I suspect that many people find the perverse imagery associated with S&M to be as unsettling as I expect that most find ideas that we're all obedient
sheep to be. Well this all is the subject for this chapter, and we're going all the way.

Although you wont often find articles in the "news" about this reality, politics is a case study in power and submission. Even though it just goes
without saying, if anything you'd get the impression from the "news" that this isn't the case. I suspect that of all categories of introspection
people could entertain, their own unconscious attitudes of submission to authority would rank among the lowest. It turns out this subject is a great
example of how bizarre we humans really are. This is made most interesting when looking at the wild world of S&M / BDSM.

The word "sadomasochism" is a portmanteau of the words sadism & masochism, which is often shortened to S&M. Sadism is "the tendency to derive
pleasure, especially sexual gratification, from inflicting pain, suffering, or humiliation on others", while Masochism is "the tendency to derive
pleasure, especially sexual gratification, from one's own pain or humiliation". Note that sexual pleasure isn't inherent to all of this, while it does
seem to become more relevant the more one reads into the fetish nature of "BDSM" stuff. For sake of scope, I found the following clarification, after
which we shall explore concepts metaphorically in "politics":

What is the difference between BDSM, D/s and S&M?
S&M is about deriving sexual pleasure from pain, where the Sadist inflicts pain upon the Masochist (what I would consider ‘sensation play’, the
sensation being pain), while B&D is play that involves physical or psychological restraints or punishment. D/s refers to psychological power-play,
where the Dominant partner controls or has power over the submissive. People can assume the Dom/sub roles during other types of play, but they can
also be reversed, for instance the Sadist acting on the Masochist’s instruction, who in that instance would be considered the Dom. A ‘Switch’ is
someone who changes roles depending on the situation/partner(s). All three can involve role play, costumes and props to varying degrees, or none at
all.

Interestingly enough, I sort of happened upon this whole perspective in searching for studies on human obedience. I hadn't entered the right search
query into the Google and it didn't look like much was coming up. But before moving to my next search string I switched over to image view, saw some
bondage images, and then it all hit me.

The relationship between Government and the governed is textbook sadomasochism.

Modern societies are largely founded on the seductive idea that valuing obedience over disobedience will bring personal success and social
cohesion. We are taught from an early age that even minor disobedience will sharply increase the likelihood of scary prospects like personal failure
and social chaos. These emotionally powerful messages are drilled into us at home and at school, cultivating the necessary habits for powerful
interests to function effectively, from parents and teachers to state institutions and large multinational corporations.

When it comes to the nature of obedience-disobedience, there is nothing we could accurately call normal. While obedience can be a particularly strong
habit to break, humans (in contrast to other primates with more hard-wired social behavioral programming) are born neither obedient nor disobedient.
We have strong tendencies to engage in both types of behavior across cultures and generations, in rational and irrational ways. Whether to obey or
disobey in any given situation is a personal choice. Human social reality is extremely variable and complex. As long as we remain social creatures, we
must deal with the obedience-disobedience question.
www.truth-out.org...
-consumer-society

Just in that opening statement we find this to be the case, linguistically speaking. Here we have an authoritative entity, thus deserving the capital
"G" in "Government", whereas its subjects as a whole, under the word "governed" doesn't seem to imply a proper mass social group as would "citizens",
it seems to me. In this view, "citizens" even hardly seems to quality of a social identity group. Switch the context from 'citizens' of a entity to
being 'nationals', such as with "Russian" or "Japanese" (proper social identity groups) and we're now able to draw pictures that don't inherently mean
subservience.

A national group identity can simply mean 'to be a part of', although in practice this tends to be much more complicated. Governments (like workplace
managers) tend to have an inherent authoritarian complex to them, which is rather well understood, the spectrum of totality being something well
discussed and studied, having numerous types of 'spectrums' or 'scales' by which to measure the related dynamics. This goes for governments and
subjects alike. The Political Compass, and the Horseshoe Spectrum are perfect examples political spectrums.

The Political Compass

The Horseshoe Spectrum

Yet political spectrums more properly describe the persons within them. For governments themselves, scales are more appropriate here:

To further realize the relationship between a government and its subjects we must also factor in Nationalism & Patriotism.

Between Nationalism and Patriotism |
Difference Between
Nationalism and patriotism both show the relationship of an individual towards his or her nation. The two are often confused and frequently believed
to mean the same thing. However, there is a vast difference between nationalism and patriotism. Nationalism means to give more importance to unity by
way of a cultural background, including language and heritage. Patriotism pertains to the love for a nation, with more emphasis on values and
beliefs.

Note that the two are often indistinguishable, at least in lip service. Consider the immediate post-9/11 era. This effect seriously amped up domestic
despotism, authoritarianism, and so on.

Yet even pre-9/11 we were already witnessing the incremental march towards total despotism. Various metrics include global American Imperialism /
American 'policing of the world', the War on Drugs, the Police State, the Surveillance Society, Two Party political concentration of power,
governmental concentration of power, corporate concentration of power / corporate welfare state legislation, domestic PSY-OP's, the Politics of Fear,
and more.

At this point many from "the left" might be thinking how this is a "Republican" thing, but from the outsiders perspective, this all cuts 'both' ways.
After all it's the "Democrat's" who are openly Big Government Statists. True, while the "Republican's" pay lip service to ideals such as "limited
government", in practice they prove to be just about as good as the opposite as the "Democrat's". Of course I argue the "republican" & "Democrat"
parties are fake conservatives, and fake liberals, respectively, which we shall get more into later.

So all things thus far considered, the relationships between governments and the governed are but inherently a scale of sadomasochism.

Being one with major authority issues, and lacking a normal group cohesion obsessionism, it's hard for me to wrap my mind around these human obedience
to power dynamics. It's hard for me to even put it into words, although I suspect it's far easier than for most 'normal' people who haven't spent much
time introspecting into this 'dark matter'.

On the one hand it's all crucial to our species survival. Without it, while humans might, none of us would exist. There would be no cities. And
on and on. Yet on the other hand, one of our single most important strengths as a species is also one of our greatest weaknesses.

In terms of politics, this subject is generally approached in examining extreme trends such as Fascism in Italy, or pretty much any example of
monarchies. The Communist societies also being choice examples as well. Although disheartening, it's always interesting for me to observe how
adherents to common modern political parties generally exhibit a total Cognitive
Dissonance when people point out how their own groups obedience dynamics parallel any of those other examples. For this reason, this might just
be one of my most important 'political' works (out of something like 1,000).

Emperor of Japan Enthronement Ceremony

Not being one to adapt well to the sadomasochistic government model, especially as being an "American", it blows my mind the concept of monarchies,
and how they still exist today.

Worse still, the bulk of the modern monarchies are probably half as sadist as in the old days. Consider the concept known as the
"Groom of the Stool", which was considered one of the most respected of positions in an
entire royal court, despite the fact that the dutiful job of such an individual was to catch the kings excrement, and to study it.

A stool grooming throne.

An S&M throne.

Human obedience is normal in healthy subjects.

The Role of Obedience in Society
Obedience is a part of the foundation of society. Without obedience, naught would exist but chaos and anarchy. Without stability, productivity and the
well-being of the citizens become non-existent. Because of this, one must question how obedient society can be without losing its individuality, for a
society with no individuality does not consist of people but of mindless drones, unthinkingly carrying out orders for the hive’s queen. Experiments
conducted by Asch, Milgram, and Zimbardo show human individuality is often subverted by the blind obedience humans feel towards those in a position of
power. In order for human beings to maintain their individuality and a stable society, a balance between obedience and insubordination must be
found.

Consensual sadomasochism was long considered pathological, but psychologists studying people interested in BDSM (bondage, discipline, sadism and
masochism) have failed to find evidence that these sexual practices are harmful. One study, published in May 2013, actually found that practitioners
of BDSM were better off than the general population in some ways, including having secure relationships and lower anxiety. Currently, the
psychiatrists’ definitive handbook, the DSM-5, lists BDSM as a paraphilia, or unusual sexual fixation, but only classifies it as a disorder if it
causes harm.

If sadomasochism is not a pathology as once believed, the question is why some people engage in these painful sexual behaviors, said James Ambler, a
graduate student in psychology at Northern Illinois University.

An important article I found while digging for useful if no for this project was
"What BDSM Teaches About Authority, Obedience and the Self" (which I
recommend reading in full). Although it came up short in directly addressing obedience to authority, it is surely the choicest go to piece for
project. Without necessarily becoming 'adult content only', it managed to candidly go into great detail the natural human urges to dominate and
submit. It does so by referencing both published literature, and S&M culture. I was quite impressed seeing it make heavy references to studies such as
the Stanford Prison Experiment, and Milgram's Obedience Experiments.

The important element is that BDSM reflects many of the theories which social psychologists study every day. Both the Milgram experiment and
BDSM teach us about obedience. Both the Stanford Prison experiment and BDSM teach us about the power of the situation, and how our attitudes are
shaped by the roles we inhabit. Both social psychologists and BDSM practitioners are familiar with the concept of the self, our ideal selves and who
we believe we ought to be and how incongruity between them can cause tension and depression. In all social interaction there is more at play than
people believe from casual observation; while BDSM might appear to be entirely sexual fetish it is an excellent reflection of society and the power
dynamics within.

As discussed in the Prologue, Milgram's experiment was set up where the subjects would shock a confederate, at the commend of an authority figure of a
scientist confederate (actors). This study rocked the intellectual world when 65% of subjects took the test to 400 volts, despite the 'victim'
screaming in pain (under the premise of them having a heart condition no less). Now if this test was originally devised today (when 'pleasure'
electrostimulation devices are actual marketable products), this story might not be so big a shocker. Hell, some people would get off on it,
yet this study was first performed in 1963!

Still on the same article, even weirder yet was how lessons from BSDM culture tells us that people actually find liberation in being commanded. I've
spent ages thinking all about all this kind of obedience stuff, and even this part made the hairs on my neck and up straight and vibrate.

Within BDSM play submissives often report that they feel a liberation in “just following orders”, in surrendering to an authority figure
(Brame, Brame & Jacobs, 1993, p. 208). There is a sense of “inevitability” which accompanies surrender, and this can manifest itself through
bondage (where the submissive is restrained and helpless to resist) and D/s scenarios (where the submissive directly carries out orders from the
dominant). This desire to submit is not due to low self-esteem, or a lack of self worth. In fact, many submissives report that outside of a BDSM
context, they are assertive and even competitive with others. Bondage has been found to be popular among people who normally resist authority, as they
derive satisfaction (and possibly relaxation) from knowing that their fate and actions are in the hands of a dominant party. The submissive often
finds the freedom to do something which normally they would not be able to, BDSM is taboo and cognitive dissonance is a factor when (for example) a
normally assertive man finds themselves wishing to submit to a woman.

Liberation in authority. Who would have thought? Then again, maybe we should have all figured on it all along. Especially so in a statist welfare
state. After all, the bigger the government (and the "smarter" the technology) the less responsibility people have to expect of themselves. And herein
lies yet another metric of government to governed sadomasochism. That is hardly even a provocative statement, on account of human concepts such as
so-called Stockholm Syndrome, or even worse
Battered Wife Syndrome.

For many reasons, submitting to authority is extremely attractive. It takes the pressure off. We don’t have to think for ourselves. If any
problems arise we don’t have to worry about deciding what to do. We can just do what the leader says and be confident that answer is the final
truth.

This innate craving for authority is rooted deeply in the human psyche. In Freud’s philosophy, the mind is divided into three segments. The id is
our primitive childish side. It causes our spontaneous desires for sex, food, and laziness. When you get an urge to quit working, take a nap, eat junk
food, or look at pictures of scantily clad members of the opposite sex, that’s the id at work. The superego is the opposite of the id. When you feel
compelled by success and ambition, the superego is exerting its influence. The ego is the moderator between the id and superego. It tries to balance
the two and is perpetually torn between extremes. Authority forms a bridge between the superego and the id, allowing the ego take a vacation. When you
submit to authority, the superego is happy because it believes you are doing the right thing, the id is happy because your childish craving for a
father is satisfied, and the ego is thrilled because for once there is peace.
www.pickthebrain.com...

A Sense of
Powerlessness Fosters System Justification: Implications for the Legitimation of Authority, Hierarchy, and Government
In an attempt to explain the stability of hierarchy, we focus on the perspective of the powerless and how a subjective sense of dependence leads them
to imbue the system and its authorities with legitimacy. In Study 1, we found in a nationally representative sample of U.S. employees that financial
dependence on one’s job was positively associated with the perceived legitimacy of one’s supervisor. In Study 2, we observed that a general sense
of powerlessness was positively correlated with the perceived legitimacy of the economic system. In Studies 3 and 4, priming experimental participants
with feelings of powerlessness increased their justification of the social system, even when they were presented with system-challenging explanations
for race, class, and gender disparities. In Study 5, we demonstrated that the experience of powerlessness increased legitimation of governmental
authorities (relative to baseline conditions). The processes we identify are likely to perpetuate inequality insofar as the powerless justify rather
than strive to change the hierarchical structures that disadvantage them.

No doubt there is some significant score of individuals whom are prone to being daily punching bags to their daily spouse, could there also be an even
larger percentile readily willing to be total pawns to sadist governors, especially when they be putting food on the table (talk about a
"Patriarchy").

We already know that
politicians are more likely to be psychopaths. And we do have some pretty clear historical examples of sadists in power. Consider Caligula, the
ancient Roman emperor. Caligula was a textbook case of being a sadist, a psychopath and a sexual deviant. He got on making grand spectacles of
humiliation and subjugation:

Human life seemed to stop having any meaning for him and he saw and used people as objects for his own amusement and nothing more. The senatorial
class suffered most from his insanity. He set up and tore down consuls without consulting them. He flagrantly raped their daughters and sons and would
likewise take their own wives for himself while at public parties. After having his fill of the woman in question he would return to the party and
tell her husband and the other guests how she had performed in bed.
madmonarchist.blogspot.com...

The authoritarian personality describes a type of person who prefers a social system with a strong ruler— the authoritarian person is
comfortable being the strong ruler but if the individual is not the strong ruler then he or she will demonstrate complete obedience to another strong
authority figure. In both cases, there is little tolerance toward nonconservative ways of thinking. People whose personalities are structured in the
manner of an authoritarian personality tend to conform to authority and believe that complete obedience to rules and regulations is completely
necessary; any deviation from rules is to be treated harshly. The authoritarian personality often results in people harboring antagonistic feelings
towards minority groups, whether religious, ethnic, or otherwise.
psychology.iresearchnet.com...

When a psychopath dominated ruling class sets about controlling the masses, and utilizes the mind sciences and all media in their grand scheme,
possibility becomes inevitability. From my perspective this is precisely the case. We've all been playing along for so long (for generations on
end),it's has been internalized as normal. To even question it is often shouted down as deviance. Yet when we extrapolate the data, that's about what
is to be expected:

Another finding in Milgram’s experiment (which has been found in additional research including Navarick’s) was that over time, a subject will
become increasingly respondent to orders. Navarick (2009) found that the longer the experiment continued, the less likely a participant was to leave.
With the most participants leaving at the tenth intensity level (the one where the ‘student’ demanded to be let free) before dropping off
dramatically, even when the ‘student’ again makes a plea to stop at the twentieth level (p. 167). There is a level of habituation which occurs, as
well as a “process of self-justification wherein each repetition of the act added to the psychological cost that would be incurred by quitting and
acknowledging that the previous obedience was an error in judgement.” (p. 166). This repetition and habituation is seen in BDSM , often when a
submissive is first introduced to the authority of a dominant. In one example, the dominant instructs the submissive to refer to her as “Mistress”
and is to begin and end every sentence as such. resonancefrequency.net...

The self-justification of this sort of control scheme surely comes easy for most, as humans seem to have a natural urge to both submit and to
dominate. This is where the Stanford Prison Experiment comes in handy:

Zimbardo (1973) was interested in finding out whether the brutality reported among guards in American prisons was due to the sadistic
personalities of the guards (i.e. dispositional) or had more to do with the prison environment (i.e. situational). For example, prisoner and guards
may have personalities which make conflict inevitable, with prisoners lacking respect for law and order and guards being domineering and aggressive.
Alternatively, prisoners and guards may behave in a hostile manner due to the rigid power structure of the social environment in prisons. If the
prisoners and guards behaved in a non-aggressive manner this would support the dispositional hypothesis, or if they behave the same way as people do
in real prisons this would support the situational explanation.

Findings: Within a very short time both guards and prisoners were settling into their new roles, with the guards adopting theirs quickly and
easily. Within hours of beginning the experiment some guards began to harass prisoners. They behaved in a brutal and sadistic manner, apparently
enjoying it. Other guards joined in, and other prisoners were also tormented.

Over the years some people have questioned the validity of Zimbardo's study, but following what went down in the Abu Ghraib Prison, those doubts have
been put to rest. Not only did the same obedience and domination scenes play out verbatim, they even took on bizarre sexual twists. Given that they
were of an inherent homosexual nature, the perverseness of it all really drives home the realities of this scope dark human nature (imagine if the
prisoner population there was predominatly female).

It basically goes without saying that clothes are effectively propaganda. Many studies have been done about peoples first impressions based on the
clothing, where the findings generally show that clothes are more important than personality. Indeed, if someone is dressed like a bum they'll be
figured to be a bum; a cop a cop; a hooker a hooker; etc.

www.policeone.com...]The
psychological influence of the police uniform
The crisp uniform of the police officer conveys power and authority. When a police officer puts on his or her uniform the officer is perceived in a
very different way by the public. He or she is viewed as embodying each person''s stereotypes about all police officers. Research has suggested that
clothing has a powerful impact on bow people are perceived, and this goes for the police officer as well. The uniform of a police officer has been
found to have a profound psychological impact on those who view it. Research has also suggested that even slight alterations to the style of the
uniform will change how citizens will perceive the officer.
...
The uniform worn by a police officer also elicits stereotypes about that human being's status, authority, attitudes, and motivations, The police
uniform serves to identify a person as one vested with the powers of the state to arrest and use force. The uniform also serves to establish order and
conformity within the ranks of those who wear it by suppressing individuality. The psychological and physical impact of the police uniform should not
be underestimated. Depending on the background of the citizen, the police uniform can elicit emotions ranging from pride and respect, to fear and
anger.

Of bread & circuses

Like how the talking points in the first main section help scale the governed sadomasochistic relationship with their government, so do the Bread &
Circuses a government it feeds its peoples.

"Bread and circuses" (or bread and games; from Latin: panem et circenses) is metonymic for a superficial means of appeasement. In the case of
politics, the phrase is used to describe the generation of public approval, not through exemplary or excellent public service or public policy, but
through diversion; distraction; or the mere satisfaction of the immediate, shallow requirements of a populace, as an offered "palliative". Its
originator, Juvenal, used the phrase to decry the selfishness of common people and their neglect of wider concerns. The phrase also implies the
erosion or ignorance of civic duty amongst the concerns of the commoner.

This phrase originates from Rome in Satire X of the Roman satirical poet Juvenal (circa A.D. 100). In context, the Latin panem et circenses (bread and
circuses) identifies the only remaining cares of a Roman populace which no longer cares for its historical birthright of political involvement.
...Juvenal here makes reference to the Roman practice of providing free wheat to Roman citizens as well as costly circus games and other forms of
entertainment as a means of gaining political power. en.wikipedia.org...

Let us here call the "circuses" the "Entertainment Denominator" (ED), the ED is all about distracting a citizenry, while the more it can
simultaneously divide them while promoting sadomasochism all the 'better'. It's purpose is to bewilder the herd. The other half is the modern
Welfare State of course, but that subject poses to take things way off subject in terms of the framing of this essay.

Being a dominatrix is much like being a journalist. In both professions, you have to be a good listener. You have to get people's names right.
Journalists are supposed to tell the truth. A dominatrix tells the story her client would like to hear. I wouldn't be able to make the comparison if I
hadn't worked in both worlds. www.theguardian.com...

It's important to note that but six megaconglomerate corporations own 90% of all conventional (pre-Internet) media outlets here in the USA. These same
corporations are completely interlocked in the modern American political system. They are indistinguishable, and as such what we get out of the toob
is a perfect reflection of modern American ED circuses.

I'm not going out on a limb here in stating that our corporate masters bread & butter is in the pandering of sex & violence. This part goes without
saying, and it shouldn't even be necessary to cite examples. However, lets look at Disney, which is supposed to be all about family entertainment.
Googling the search terms "disney debauchery" brings up "1,460,000 results". An abyss to be found there, where only one little tidbit is really
needed:

Modern Music: Promoting
pedophilia to adults and sexual debauchery to children
With the unlikely aim of "motivating mothers and daughters to build lifetimes of memories together and inspire kids around the world to live their
dreams", Miley succeeds merely in glamorising and openly promoting pathologically, hyper-sexualised ideals such as excessive promiscuity, bisexuality,
the public use of sexual paraphernalia and explicit drug misuse. Basically, this is pedophilic sexual debauchery presented to us in the form of a
mentally-disturbed 22 year old girl with the emotional maturity of the average politician. It's not surprising then that the bulk of her target
audience is between the ages of 6-14 year olds. In the name of "feminism" and "freedom", it is possible that Miley truly believes that parading her
infectious filth across the world for young, vulnerable minds to absorb is acting in favour of the "greater good" and standing up for women's rights
to express their sexuality. But what Miley believes is irrelevant. What she achieves is to support the goal of our pathocratic system to produce as
many intellectually and emotionally-stunted adolecents as possible, to fill the ranks of the up and coming political class.

It is not surprising that Miley is one of the "Disney Kids" that have exploded onto the music scene in recent decades. Does anyone remember what
happened to Britney Spears? It's gut wrenching to imagine the trauma and suffering that these 'just turned' superstars were probably made to endure as
young children at the hands of the Hollywood music industry's predatory pedophile networks. Yes, that's right. Pedophilia is apparently not only
rife in political inner circles, but the
music and film industries
are also badly infected with it. This is not so difficult to believe when you understand that psychopaths usually manage to work their way up to
the top of any given sector, and seem to congregate with others who have similar 'predilections'.

ABC Obsessed with Alternative
Sexual Lifestyles
Youngsters' curiosity about sex used to be sated by late night, soft-core flicks on premium cable channels. Now, they simply have to tune into ABC.
ABC news programs have featured 76 segments about sexual activity in the last six months. The majority of these reports were related to political sex
scandals or crime cases that contained a sexual element, but 11 promoted alternative sexual arrangements such as men who become women, Web sites
dedicated to helping married people cheat on their spouses and even people who carry on romantic relationships with objects like F-15 fighter jets and
the Eiffel Tower.

For violence we'll go with the most extreme example of the MSM's de facto promotion of it. Consider the
Mass Shooter Contagion Effect, whereby the methods in which the MSM reports shooter
events actually helps drive copycat's, in an endless cycle. The scientific basis of the whole thing is well understood now, and yet the MSM hasn't
changed the model nor has the government stepped in to do anything about (they prefer to blame guns of course).

A person claiming to be the alleged gunman in the Virginia attack sent a 23-page fax to ABC News after the shooting, claiming to be influenced by
Seung-Hui Cho, the killer in the Virginia Tech shooting of 2007. "He got NEARLY double the amount that Eric Harris and Dylann [sic] Klebold [the
Columbine shooters] got," the writer of the fax added, according to ABC News. The fax also claimed that the shooting was in response to the mass
killing at a Charleston church in June. www.livescience.com...

This kind of MSM behavior isn't exclusive to Disney's network, of course. Even the supposedly "conservative" MSM outlet, FOX News, is well known and
criticized for pandering sex & violence. It is interesting to note that FOX was the exception in recent media coverage of election 'scandals', where
although they did give even coverage of Hillary Clinton's political scandals, they still lived up to their expectations of coverings Donald Trump's
sex 'scandal' tape. My recent "Exclusive MSM Analysis Reveals: They Have Gone FULL TABLOID (Trump Tapes vs. WikiLeaks Reveals All)" piece
broke this whole affair down by the numbers.

Such coverage, despite their masquerading as do-gooders, are still promoting such acts, which in this case would be the clearest example of sexual
sadomasochism at the presidential level. Well, at least since Bill Clinton anyways (whom the MSM have been pulling all the stops to put back into the
White House). If only the MSM could claim ignorance, but like with Mass Shooter Contagion Effect, they should already know better about their recent
sexscapde:

It's been nearly 20 years since the Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky scandal made "oral sex" a household term; young kids went from skipping that
phase of sex altogether to offering it or receiving it even before a first kiss on the lips. According to The New York Times, "Oral sex is very much
part of the teenage sexual repertory. More than half of all teenagers aged 15 to 19 have engaged in oral sex - including nearly a quarter of those who
have never had intercourse." www.drlaura.com...

Taking all of this in, one might argue that Caligula is the idol of our MSM and politician overlords. Caligua (who died at age 28) knew mastery
of both bread and circus.

Caligula was also quick to put the vast treasury left by Tiberius to good use in winning greater popularity for himself. He gave the Praetorian
Guard a hefty bonus, distributed money to the common people and declared a general amnesty to free all of those imprisoned by the paranoia of
Tiberius. Celebrations were held constantly with hundreds of thousands of animals sacrificed in thanksgiving of the accession of the young Caesar the
people called their star and their baby. ...He did his best to appear as the ideal ruler, giving generously to those who had been taxed into poverty,
expelling sexual criminals, setting aside the air of fear and paranoia that had preceded him and trying to maintain a closeness with the people
through imperial pageantry and ceremony. Free elections were revived to give the people more say in government and gladiatorial games were held
regularly to keep them entertained. In short, he did everything that a good Roman emperor was expected to do in order to be popular with the people.
madmonarchist.blogspot.com...

Now consider one of today's other primary pop culture institutions: SPORTS. On sports, scholar and freedom fighter Noam Chomsky put it best:

When I was in high school I asked myself at one point: "Why do I care if my high school's team wins the football game?
I don't know anybody on the team, they have nothing to do with me... why am I here and applaud? It does not make any sense. But the point is, it does
make sense: It's a way of building up irrational attitudes of submission to authority and group cohesion behind leadership elements. In fact it's
training in irrational jingoism. That's also a feature of competitive sports.

Who could argue that society hasn't been inundated with sports mentality culture? And like any other mass social engineering or marketing initiative,
the most ideal method is in targeting the children (just ask Goebbels).

If such an art of active mass influence through propaganda is joined with the long-term systematic education of a
nation, and if both are conducted in a unified and precise way, the relationship between the leadership and the nation will always remain close. From
authority and following, that type of modern democracy will develop for which Germany is the model for the entire world in the twentieth century.
-Joseph Goebbels research.calvin.edu...

Add to that this quote the infamous [rl=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bernays]Edward Bernays[/url] in his quite revealing book, "Propaganda",
written in 1928:

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society.
Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.

In contemporary society, the most powerful authorities are the interlocking boards of directors of major business corporations and the state
apparatuses that support them. As in the Milgram paradigm, the demands made by these authorities on today's consumers and citizens are leading to
increasingly grave consequences for human life, including dangers that were not foreseen when Corporate America first launched the mass consumerist
experiment in the years following World War
I.www.truth-out.org...
us-consumer-society

The results can actually be measured:

If one in five children are going to the ER for treatment related to sport injuries, the question must be asked (Healy
2013). Are we pushing our youngest athletes too far?
sportsandsocietylc.wordpress.com...

"My city-state can beat up your city-state" has been one of my satires of sports culture. Next we have 'my political party can beat up your political
party'.

S&M Parties.

So far we've delved deep into the sadomasochistic nature of our government and their MSM propaganda outlet. Now let us examine the "Two party System"
we've found our society dominated by for ages.

It's why it was setup to begin with (collusion between the "Republican's" & "Democrat's").

An independent can’t be
President; here’s the real reason why
The Democratic and Republican parties, with full malice and intent, have acted to create a rigged duopoly. Neither wants a third challenger, and both
have actively colluded to prevent one from ever having a chance. The parties instinctively understand that their key to political power lies in making
sure that the choice is between the lesser of two evils. One way is by making it nearly impossible for third-party candidates to compete for
donations on a level playing field. Right after the 2014 midterms, the leaders of the Democratic and Republican parties in Congress met in secret and
then changed the law so that individual donors giving to the two major party candidates could donate $834,000 per year in total contributions through
their parties while those giving to independents were limited to just $2,700.

There are obstacles, too, at the state level. While Democratic and Republican parties are automatically put on the ballot, independents face
different hurdles in all 50 states, including filing deadlines that are far too early, differing signature requirements, and other onerous regulations
that make it difficult and costly to get on the ballot.

Then, there are the obstacles placed by the Federal Election Commission (FEC), which was established in the wake of Watergate to oversee the
conduct of federal campaigns. That FEC has become the most notorious, ineffective, inefficient and corrupt of all federal agencies. It is composed
of three super-partisan members – often undisputable political hacks – from each of the two major parties. Because every vote is potentially a
tie, each side is able to stymie any meaningful enforcement or regulation of the electoral system and to protect its side from any tough political
sanctions. In most cases, the two parties collude to protect the duopoly. The chance that a challenge by an independent or third-party will be
considered on the merits is about as favorable as the chance an African-American had of passing a literacy test in my native South when I was a child.

So there we can see "both" 'S&M party's' working together to dominate the political landscape. And if you look at the outrage over reports like
that... well there hardly ever is any. It's hardly even news worthy. Here we're supposed to be a democracy minded people, and yet we have the masses
lock step with the oppressive Two Party model. I'll take that as good evidence that the propaganda of this bondage based system has been well received
by the masses.

"Bondage" may be the term most easily associated with BSDM fetish culture stuff, and how perfect a word to set this section off considering
historically the word bondage has surely been most associated with political systems. Likewise, torture is a common motif there as well.

A depiction of an midieval torture chamber.

An S&M torture chamber.

It is already understood that authority figures i.e. police uniforms) are common motifs in the BDSM scene. It is rather inherent after all, but within
this concept is the perplexing role of political motifs that also manifest in some of the types really into this stuff.

More pain, more gain
I like to find out what a man does for a living. I see a lot of Wall Street types who go for bondage and humiliation. Lawyers, actors and
entertainment executives never shut up. I have to gag them right away if I'm to have any peace. True masochists are rare - they're usually police and
ex-military. These men are such show-offs about how much pain they can take. I end up acting the role of a sadistic drill instructor, breaking canes
and riding crops on their backs, which gives me a certain confidence in our armed forces.

My British-educated clients inevitably want some recreation of public school discipline, with caning, birch canes, wooden paddles, all of that. It's
appalling that any of this was done to them as children, but I love them for it now. These sessions are so much fun. American men are terrified of
caning, because it can leave welts, but I know how to do it so the marks fade within two hours.

I try to avoid certain types of sessions. Because I'm not blonde, I don't get many requests for racist role play, in which black clients want to be
horribly abused by a white woman, the paler the better. Mistress and slave - plantation fantasies, they're called. Hasidic and Orthodox Jewish men
sometimes request medical role play sessions in which the dominatrix portrays a white-coated Nazi doctor examining them in a death camp. Pass, fail.
Life, death. I've done it once: the young man asked me beforehand to plait my hair, pin it up on my head, and speak in an English or German accent.
'Be really cold, OK? Don't even look at me.'

To go even deeper, the new trend the past decade has been about the rapid integration of
Muslim's into Western societies. It's not merely to say more of them have happened to have been migrating, instead the situation has been an
overt agenda to enact such in haste by the Ruling Establishment's in the US and EU alike. This is most easily identified in the fact that with the
Political Correctness ideology they push, no matter how
dark and wicked some of their sadist old world cultural norms come out to be, we're
being taught that its wrong to criticize any of it.

Sadomasochism and the Jihadi Death Cult
But what of the Western converts who join the jihadi cults? What is the draw for them? It is nearly the same. From examining their childhoods, the
majority are born into what I call shame-honor Western families—highly rigid and authoritarian or lacking any parental structure at all. And then
there are the numerous jailhouse converts. Many criminals have a cognitive deficit, and some show signs of clinical sadomasochism. A sadist seeks
power through control, manipulation, and forcing the other to submit. Intimacy comes only with violence. They feel, they bond, through
violence:

Even outside of those extremes, on this topic the goals of the leadership to inject a culture that is largely authoritarian & despotic in practice is
interesting to note. The 1933 term "Islamic Fascism" didn't come from no where.

Considering the increasing trend towards authoritarianism in the US, I suppose it's easy for the masses to rationalize some of all that.

It is a truism among academics that political conservatives like to be ordered around. A new study,
"Political Conservatives' Affinity for Obedience to Authority is Loyal, Not Blind," published by researchers from the University of Winnipeg in the
journal Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, looks more deeply at how "obedience" works among conservative and liberals. One confounding
problem they discover with prior research is that when researchers simply ask people about how to respond to "authorities," research subjects
typically infer "authority" means "conservative authority." reason.com...

The
findings suggest that obedience itself is not ideologically divisive. Counter to the intuition that obedience itself is a mode of conduct that
conservatives preferentially champion, these data suggest that liberals and conservatives have the same sentiments about obedience. Conservatives only
favor obedience when they perceive the authority to be a conservative. Liberals also favor obedience when the authority shares their ideology...

The Occupy Wall Street movement justified ignoring police and court orders on the grounds of justice, democracy, and protection of individual
rights. Conservative groups such as the U.S. Tea Party and the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood too have challenged authorities. Both liberals and
conservatives have the moral psychology for flaunting the orders of authorities. Preference for obedience is contextually bound; both liberals and
conservatives call for rebellion when the authorities are from the “other team.”
www.jeremyfrimer.com...

So what have been the results of the Two Party via MSM game? An increasingly polarized and divided nation, which is also increasingly prone to
vitriolic mud flinging & trolling, as well as in committing acts of violence to one another (which can be seen en masse in grand form in my
"Social Justice Assault Warriors TV Marathon! thread).

The response of “Yes, Mistress” steadily came easier and the psychological effect of being a maid to a wealthy woman became stronger as the
role-playing progressed. Aided by symbols such as the whip, collar and uniform, there was a very real sense of helplessness instilled in the mind of
the submissive when in reality the dominant had no real power over her. There was also a restriction on what the submissive felt she could do and how
she could speak because she did not wish to step outside of the bounds of her role. In general her speech became more brief and yielding, and this was
not only because she had been told to do so, but because to challenge the dominant was something a maid is not supposed to do. Happening regardless of
the fact that the submissive was not actually a maid and that the dominant was not actually a wealthy noblewoman. The power of roles and role-playing
is at work within BDSM, and the Stanford prison experiment shows how the roles we take do influence our attitudes and behavior (to the point where the
experiment came to resemble a BDSM scene itself).
resonancefrequency.net...

Psychological Aspects of Consensual Rape
The second possible definition of consensual rape is “built into” a Master/slave relationship. This case may be such that the slave is not
particularly excited about a sexual activity at that given time, but the Master is able to force His will upon the girl, by the nature of their
relationship. This is consensual from the standpoint that the slave would have agreed to the terms of the relationship at the beginning of
negotiations. It would be my hope that this scenario would have been discussed and clearly stated where each party stands on this issue before the
relationship would continue in a M/s fashion. For Master and myself, I have agreed and signed a contract stating that my body is available for His use
at any time. He owns my body, and therefore does not need my permission to utilize that which He owns. However, by the definition of rape, if one
party has not given consent to the act, it is rape. I may not be in the mood. I may cry and beg and scream for Him to not use me. However, it is His
decision to do so or not. My consent was given when I signed our contract, no matter my feelings at any given point in time.

All points taken in now, to wrap up my Politics is a Sadomasochistic Sport argument, BDSM culture is also on the uptick towards the mainstream.

Is S&M going mainstream?
It looks that way. Twenty to 30 years ago, surveys suggested 10 to 15 percent of Americans had tried it at least once. Five to 10 percent had engaged
occasionally in BDSM—an umbrella term for bondage, dominance/submission, and sadomasochism. Fewer embrace it as a lifestyle or identity: Even in big
cities, attendance at BDSM conventions is said to be only 1,500 to 2,000. But in the last year, the Fifty Shades of Grey trilogy has sold more than 65
million copies. The membership of FetLife, a social networking site for BDSM enthusiasts, has doubled to nearly 2 million. Sales of books and
equipment have increased. So has attendance at BDSM events. BDSM-related Internet searches (domination, master, sex slave, sadism) went up 70 to 80
percent. College groups devoted to “kink,” largely BDSM, gained official recognition at Tufts and Harvard. Pillars of the media
establishment—ABC, Fox News, the New York Times—are exploring the rise of kink in unflinching detail.

Political advocates for BDSM see themselves as successors to the gay rights movement. They cite Lawrence v. Texas. They call themselves “sexual
minorities” and depict kink as a “sexual orientation.” They seek “legitimacy” by bringing BDSM “into the mainstream eye.” They ask to be
“accepted,” “validated,” and “normalized.” They wonder, according to the Times, whether “they are approaching a time when they, like the
LGBT community before them, can come out and begin living more open, integrated lives.”

Under the Bread & CIRCUSES section I was tempted to include my theory that the creepy clown phenomenon that's been going all the sudden this season on
might be in part a manifestation of the actual circus nature of this election.

I was also intent on working this Singapore National Day celebration stage show into there somewhere, as a good example of modern 'democratic' states
self-portrayals of well, themselves.

(thats Larry page I edited into the eye for my Google GODzilla parody, a long time ago)

The world is litterally waiting for a man to tell them it's ok to get along. It's crazy that we need a leader to tell us to do what we know is right
before we will actually do anything about it.

The sheep wait for a leader to declare peace. The sheep wait for a leader to solve poverty.
The sheep are waiting on a leader to .......

While the sheep wait the sadists keep pushing forward while the masochists (sheep) keep calling the pain necessary.

The handful of us on the outside looking in sit back in awe of the pure insanity of the entire system. Hopefully the time is now that we stop waiting
for a savior and start recognizing ourselves in the mirror.

I have no issue with people consensually engaging in BDSM in their private lives - or even publicly if that's what they all agree to and no one is
being truly harmed. But it's definitely interesting to see the underlying psycho-social basis of that dynamic extrapolated out to the scale of
government. And, I agree, it's disturbing.

That said, there's another even - in my opinion - more pernicious and overlooked manifestation of this kind of dynamic that is equally disturbing to
me. That is, the mainstreaming of shadenfreude. Or as I call it, "misanthropy as entertainment." We couch it in innocuous sounding language like
"trolling" or find other ways to justify it, but it seems to me that there is an increasingly accepted tendency to derive literal entertainment from
disruption, provocation, and even just outright meanness.

It's at its least hidden and most unvarnished during the political season in my opinion, but it seems ever more readily the norm, especially on the
internet. Which is another thing that concerns me, because I feel like people have a continuing tendency - perhaps a holdover from when internet
connectivity and communication were less ubiquitous - to justify it by saying, "It's just the internet." But thanks to social media, the internet now
has a profound - perhaps even disproportionate - influence on our societies and cultures. So saying, "It's just the internet," is now akin to saying,
"it's just the whole world and our default medium for communication, don't worry about it."

in a nut shell, I have perceived what feels at least anecdotally and intuitively like a steadily increasing acceptance of misanthropy in general,
irrespective of milieu, and it's disturbed me.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.